Vits, me and the rest of the world would really appreciate it if you stopped speaking for us. Don't be so egotistical to think you can assume what EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE thought of Indy 4. Personally I have yet to meet a single person who liked that movie, and it's received plenty of negative criticism from movie critics (the ones who weren't paid off by Lucas I bet). George Lucas originally wanted the movie to be called "Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men" for god's sake, just to give you an idea of the staggering level of incompetence put into this film. For true fans of the original Indiana Jones movies it was the biggest disappointment of the year and I believe it truly deserved its razzie.

Vits, me and the rest of the world would really appreciate it if you stopped speaking for us. Don't be so egotistical to think you can assume what EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE thought of Indy 4.

Now you are assuming the number of critics paid off... and assuming they were paid off at all.

Originally posted by razelfragel

Personally I have yet to meet a single person who liked that movie, and
it's received plenty of negative criticism from movie critics (the ones
who weren't paid off by Lucas I bet).

Originally posted by razelfragel

George Lucas originally wanted
the movie to be called "Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men" for god's
sake, just to give you an idea of the staggering level of incompetence
put into this film.

I'm not a fan of his. I actually think he takes the artistic value away every time he so-called "fixes" a movie.

Originally posted by razelfragel

For true fans of the original Indiana Jones movies
it was the biggest disappointment of the year and I believe it truly
deserved its razzie.

I would agree with you if there was a concensus on whether the Worst Remake/Sequel category is for movies that could have been good, but still disappointed compared to the original. But a lot of people vote based on simply bad movies that just happened to have adapted scripts.

I mispoke.Whenever I bash you for awarding INDY 4 it's not just me talking.It's also audiences and critics.As for the ratings...yeah,I have a history like that.

Critics and audiences only liked "Indy 4" because it was a throw back to their childhoods, but once the childhood memories pass, you realize the movies sucks compared to the original 3. I don't care if people don't like that choice, but it was the right choice because the movie was a big let down. Take a note from How It Should Have Ended:

2008. The only 00-Agent to act consecutively with James Bond instead of concurrently was Agent 008. Starting in Goldfinger, if Bond weren't to report into MI6, Agent 008 would replace him. Here's my take on the Year of the Successor to Bond:

Films that should've been RAZZed, but didn't: 4

Strange Wilderness

Superhero Movie

Babylon AD

Bangkok Dangerous

Films that got RAZZed, but shouldn't have: 3

The Wackness

Mamma Mia!

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull //I call it the "Predecessor's Shadow Parameter". If a film has decent reviews and would block out far worse films from getting RAZZed, it can still get nominated for Worst PSRR just for being in the shadow of its predecessor.

Films that got RAZZed to the wrong degree: 0

Worst Trends/Events of 2008:

V. Long-dormant franchises revived into empty shells of sequels (Ex. Crystal Skull, Rambo IV. Not that they should've been nominated or, in the case of Crystal Skull, deserved to be, but it's been happening a lot since 2008. They haven't had a new installment since the 80's or thereabout, and over 2 decades later, they get some of the most un-asked-for sequels ever!)IV. Pierce and Paris pierce our ears with their singing (Repo! The Genetic Opera and Mamma Mia!)III. Bollywood comes to America, and Mike Myers ruins it all (The Love Guru was FAR more offensive to India than Slumdog Millionaire, and that's saying a lot, because Slumdog made India look like a total ****hole!)II. Seltzer and Friedberg, we've had enough of your F****** B*******!!! (The only year so far in which Seltzerberg struck twice, and even we were complaining!)I. A German Ed Wood leads the spike in video game films (In the Name of the King, Postal, 1968 Tunnel Rats, Max Payne. More video game movies than any other year, and it'll be pretty tough to exceed, even with how bad Hollywood's gotten this millennium.)

Surprisingly, I will not talk about Indy and the crystal skull. But I will give my overall thought about the 29th Annual Razzie Awards.

At first, I was kind of surprised (but not really) that "The Love Guru" won Worst Picture and Worst Screenplay. I actually thought "The Hottie and The Nottie" was far worse. But then I really started to think about it. "The Hottie and the Nottie" really didn't affect Paris Hilton's career at all. She is still an heiress that is selfish, egotistical and mostly we haven't really seen her in awhile in film or on the tabloids as of late. But "The Love Guru" was different in two ways. First a lot more people saw this film than "The Hottie and the Nottie". So a lot more people knew how bad it really was. Also, I hate to say it but "The Love Guru" was the film that pretty much killed Mike Myer's career. Besides that film and the final Shrek installment, we haven't seen him in film. There are rumors he might be in a possible 4th Austin Powers film, but again those are just rumors. So yeah, I fully agree with "The Love Guru" winning the 3 Razzie Awards it got.

"The Hottie and the Nottie" really didn't affect Paris Hilton's career at all. She is still an heiress that is selfish, egotistical and mostly we haven't really seen her in awhile in film or on the tabloids as of late.

Are you sure? I mean, around 2003 and 2004, she started to appear in a movie per year. THE HOTTIE & THE NOTTIE and REPO! were her last theatrical releases. Since then, she's been producing a bunch of reality shows. But my point is that she was kind of "big" at one time.

Originally posted by moviecritic1994

I hate to say it but "The Love Guru" was the film that pretty much killed Mike Myer's career.

You're right. When it came out, it became official than him, Eddie Murphy and Cameron Diaz needed the SHREK franchise, because their live-action movies weren't very good.

Originally posted by oiram

You forgot Inglourious Basterds.

Even though he was included in the Best Ensemble awards the film won, it was an extended cameo that doesn't proof he can have his career back.

I still don't really understand why Adam Sandler even has a career after two horribly made films. Granted, I thought Just Go With It was okay, I didn't like it or love it but it was okay. However, the additions of "Jack and Jill" "Bucky Larson, Born to be a Star" and "That's my Boy" seemed like nails to his career coffin. However, he's going to be in "Grown ups 2" and possibly a Candy land film.

He doesn't see the difference between them. When JACK & JILL and THAT'S MY BOY underperformed at the box office, I was like "Great! Now he'll understand!". But he still won some public voting awards for them. He still thinks his movies are what the people wants.

While "Grown ups" only got nominated for Worst Supporting Actor (Rob Schinder) the sequel looks worse than the first. Comedy that is over the top like in Grown Ups or Jack and Jill is really idiotic and stupid. I don't even want to imagine what "Candyland" will be like .

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou can vote in polls in this forum